I just wish that Planned Parenthood would openly disclose the ideals presented by its' founder Mrs. Sanger and her philosophy regarding 'family planning' and the unwanteds.At the very least, if Planned Parenthood and NOW believes so strongly in this practice then why not call it what it is, abortion instead of softening the rhetoric with such a meaningless word as pro-choice. It really is not pro-choice when Sanger's ideals are involved. Anyway, Sanger's philosopy will come to light once the homosexual gene is identified and gays begin their own battle for right to life. Unfortunately, Planned Parenthood cannot see this inevitable battle of control is just on the horizon and it is going to get very ugly.That said, were is Susan B. Anthony when you need her?

There are lots of former drug users who are now in favor of the War on Some Drugs. Why would abortion be different?

About PP and Sanger: That's like saying GWB is a fascist because his grandfather did business with pre-WWII German companies.PP performs valuable services by disseminating birth control info and providing low cost GYN exams. There is not one whiff of eugenics in any of its principles or actions, and what one of its founders advocated 80 years ago is irrelevant. " There are lots of former drug users who are now in favor of the War on Some Drugs. Why would abortion be different?"Agreed. However, I still maintain that most women who have had to confront the abortion question personally will have a less black-and-white view of it that most of the commenters on that thread. in fact, ALL the women who chose to comment on that thread had a more nuanced view. I know there are women who are as zealous as men on this issue, but they didn't show up on that thread, and my experience is that they rarely do. FWIW, once the anti-abortion talk gets contemptuous and simplistic, it's almost always men engaging in it.

PS also, read the thread and note the obliviousness and contempt towards anyone who isn't Christian.

I doubt you need someone like me defending you, Judith, either on RedState or anywhere else, but I threw in my two cents, too.The thread over there reminds me of why my politics are small-l libertarian, rather than conservative. The notion that the interests of the woman are completely irrelevant after the moment of conception strikes me as, at best, mind-bogglingly obtuse, and far more likely, appallingly misogynist. It makes me want to spit nails.The only thing that makes the whole sorry spectacle bearable is the utter ridiculouslness of these ideologues behaving as if their recent electoral successes -- manufactured almost wholly out of Republican foreign policy -- indicate there's a majority, or even significant minority, constituency for their views. I can think of no faster way for the Republican Party to self-destruct than for it to hitch its wagon to that kind of pro-life absolutism.I say, "Let me know how the misogyny works out for you electorally."They say, "Two of three branches of government, with the Supreme Court next."I say, "Sure. And do send me a postcard when you get Roe overturned, so I know when to stop holding my breath."